Are ancient computers still useful?

The OS was written in 100% assembly language so it is super fast, efficient, and virus resistant.

Since it does not have the same files in use as any version of Windows and it uses a floppy so you can write another floppy image to get back to a clean OS (this is almost as good as a Live CD image) .

I suspect the rolley eyes were more at the fact that anyone could write something in 100% assembly and be happy about it.

When I looked, it was a Sempron 1800+ or something like that with a whooping 184MB of RAM. Her cellphone had more RAM and more processing power.

I think this is what really blows my mind these days. My cellphone has more processing power, RAM, storage, and even a higher resolution display (though it is smaller) than the first computer that I bought. All of that power in my hand.

Heck, my cellphone has more as more processing power, RAM, storage, and even a higher resolution display (though it is smaller) than the second computer that I bought. Beats the Pentium and the PIII. Not the P4, though... (let alone the C2D laptop, the C2D desktop, or the Arrandale i7 laptop ...).

As far as dropping the 386, I'm thinking it might be a good idea to drop support for everything below the Pentuim Pro.

I don't think that is a good idea. 486 compatible chips are still being sold for embedded applications, and yes, at least some of those systems support Linux-based software stacks. "Pont" mentions rad-hardened 386 variants, though I don't know whether Linux is used for those, or whether any new development is still targeting those.

Secondly, the other major motivation for dropping 386 support was that it lacks some features crucial for parts of the core kernel code. The 386-specific workarounds for those lacking features were fragile, and quite likely broken anyway as nobody tests 386-specific code paths any more. There is no similar benefit from dropping 486 and Pentium support.

Secondly, the other major motivation for dropping 386 support was that it lacks some features crucial for parts of the core kernel code. The 386-specific workarounds for those lacking features were fragile, and quite likely broken anyway as nobody tests 386-specific code paths any more. There is no similar benefit from dropping 486 and Pentium support.